Wright

The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (the CUA) ensures that Californians who obtain and use marijuana for specified medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to certain criminal sanctions. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11362.5.) 1 Specifically, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to the crimes of possessing marijuana (§ 11357) and cultivating marijuana (§ 11358) for physician-approved personal medical purposes. (§ 11362.5, subd. (d).) However, the CUA does not provide a defense to the crime of transporting marijuana. A conflict arose in the Court of Appeal regarding whether and under what circumstances an implied defense to this offense existed under the statute. (Compare People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532 [ 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 559 ] with People v. Young (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 229 [ 111 Cal.Rptr.2d 726 ].) In this case, defendant Shaun Eric Wright was convicted of transporting marijuana after the trial court *85 declined to instruct the jury that the CUA provided a defense to that charge. The Court of Appeal, concluding the refusal was prejudicial error, reversed. We granted review to resolve the issue.

While this case was pending, however,…

I concur in the majority’s judgment, but I disagree sharply with certain of its intermediate conclusions. To place my views in context, I briefly review the facts and procedural background.

In 2001, defendant was arrested while transporting one pound three ounces of marijuana in his pickup truck. Officers stopped the truck on a tip and confirmed that it “reeked” of marijuana. Defendant twice denied there was marijuana in the tmck. Yet a search of his backpack, which had been located on tiie passenger seat, revealed numerous baggies containing premeasured amounts of marijuana. The backpack also contained an electronic scale. Further searching revealed a one-pound brick of marijuana concealed in a storage compartment behind the passenger seat. 1 The truck contained no paraphernalia for personal use.

Defendant was charged with transporting marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11360, subd. (a)) 2 and possession of marijuana for sale (§ 11359). During his 2002 trial, at a hearing under Evidence Code section 402, he sought an instruction asserting, as to both charges, a defense authorized by the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (CUA; § 11362.5). At the time of defendant’s trial, this defense…

The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (the CUA) ensures that Californians who obtain and use marijuana for specified medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to certain criminal sanctions. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11362.5.) [1] Specifically, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to the crimes of possessing marijuana (§ 11357) and cultivating marijuana (§ 11358) for physician-approved personal medical purposes. (§ 11362.5, subd. (d).) However, the CUA does not provide a defense to the crime of transporting marijuana. A conflict arose in the Court of Appeal regarding whether and under what circumstances an implied defense to this offense existed under the statute. (Compare People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532 , 66 Cal. Rptr.2d 559 with People v. Young (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 229 , 111 Cal.Rptr.2d 726 .) In this case, defendant Shaun Eric Wright was convicted of transporting marijuana after the trial court declined to instruct the jury that the CUA provided a defense to that charge. The Court of Appeal, concluding the refusal was prejudicial error, reversed. We granted review to resolve the issue.

While this case was pending, however, the…